ABSTRACT

This paper examines the challenges and possibilities of combining archival and ethnographic methods in the field of ‘communal’ violence studies in India. Drawing insights from debates among historians and anthropologists on the multifarious interactions between archives and ethnography and reflecting on the empirical case of persistent violence between Muslims and Christians in southern India, it argues for a creative synthesis of these two modes of inquiry for an adequate understanding of ‘communal’ violence and riot inquiry commissions in India. First, the paper critiques how colonial and postcolonial Indian archival reports problematically inscribe violence between any religious communities (such as Muslims and Christians) in the same narrative as the predominant case of Hindu-Muslim conflict. Second, it illuminates how archival ethnography can be an effective way of studying violence between religious communities and thus transcend conventional disciplinary boundaries. Finally, the paper introduces a nuanced approach, called ‘ethnography of archiving’, to detail the judicial and nonjudicial discourses and bureaucratic manoeuvring involved in the creation of an archival report, thereby unravelling the power relations, mediating processes, manipulations and bureaucratic performances that make commission reports problematic even today.

摘要

本文考察了在印度“社区”暴力研究领域结合档案和民族志方法的挑战和可能性。从历史学家和人类学家之间关于档案和人种学之间各种相互作用的辩论中汲取见解，并反思印度南部穆斯林和基督徒之间持续暴力的经验案例，它主张创造性地综合这两种调查模式，以充分理解印度的“社区”暴力和骚乱调查委员会。首先，这篇论文批评了殖民和后殖民印度档案报告如何在与印度穆斯林冲突的主要案例相同的叙述中将任何宗教社区（例如穆斯林和基督徒）之间的暴力刻画成问题。第二，它阐明了档案民族志如何成为研究宗教社区之间暴力的有效方式，从而超越传统的学科界限。最后，本文介绍了一种称为“档案民族志”的细致入微的方法，详细介绍了创建档案报告所涉及的司法和非司法话语以及官僚操纵，从而揭示了造成档案报告的权力关系、调解过程、操纵和官僚行为。委员会报告即使在今天也有问题。